J.D. Heyes

Aprl 1, 2016

(NaturalNews) For the past several years, as it rose in popularity, "raw" milk – that is, milk that has not undergone pasteurization – has been heavily criticized as being unclean, disease-ridden and dangerous to consume. But a growing body of research and evidence suggests that pasteurizing milk may actually be robbing us of vital protection against major allergic conditions, as well as destroying many nutrients that contribute to much better health, the UK's Daily Mail Online reports.

While raw milk can be legally purchased from farmers, milk sold in retail stores must be pasteurized – that is, a process by which milk is heated to about 162 degrees F for 25 seconds, in order to remove any E.coli and other potentially lethal pathogens like salmonella.

But the process may also be destroying vital nutrients that protect us from a range of sicknesses and ailments, as well as allergies in children and adults.

The Mail Online further reported that a study involving more than 1,100 children by pediatric allergy specialists at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich, Germany, found that kids who regularly consumed unpasteurized milk had a much lower risk of developing allergic asthma.

The Daily Mail also noted:

"The findings of this large-scale, long-term (six-year) study are in line with earlier, smaller studies. But the German study also points to omega 3 fatty acids as the substance in raw milk that may be key to the benefits. Tabea Brick, one of the immunologists who led the research, says that these play a crucial role in enabling the body to create chemicals that reduce harmful inflammation."

Wrongful persecution

Essentially, asthma is an inflammatory allergic reaction in the lungs' airways.

"Fresh, unprocessed cow's milk has a higher content of omega 3 than does pasteurised, homogenised [where it's treated to stop the cream separating] or low-fat milk," she wrote in this month's edition of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. "This factor partly explains why children who consume the unprocessed product are less likely to develop asthma."

While our bodies don't produce omega 3 fatty acids, they can nevertheless come from foods like fish and dairy products (though raw dairy is much better for you). Still, the authors of the German study decided not to actually recommend that consumers switch to unpasteurized milk due to bacterial concerns.

So, instead, the researchers are urging milk producers to developing processing techniques that are far less aggressive than pasteurization so that all the beneficial components in milk are protected and preserved while still eliminating pathogens.

In the United States, raw milk producers have become the target of various federal and state government agencies whose interests are motivated more by outside lobbying groups than by giving the American people the freedom to choose whatever form of milk they wish to consume.

Irrational and unsubstantiated fear of raw milk

As reported by NaturalNews, Hochstetler, of rural Middlebury, Ind., began being harassed by federal officials after they suspected his farm of being the source of a 2010 bacteria outbreak in Michigan. However, an investigation by a county sheriff failed to yield evidence substantiating those claims. He was defended by his local sheriff, who warned federal officials of consequences – including arrest – if they continued to search Hochstetler's property without a proper, constitutional, court-issued warrant, as required by the Fourth Amendment.

What's the government's real problem with raw milk anyway? According to Economics 21, it is born of an irrational – and incorrect – view of the product:

"The CDC states that 'While it is possible to get foodborne illnesses from many different foods, raw milk is one of the riskiest of all.' Yet newly-released CDC data show that, from 2007 to 2012, there were a total of 81 reported outbreaks associated with unpasteurized milk and that these outbreaks resulted in 979 illnesses, 73 hospitalizations, and 0 deaths. Over a five-year period of relatively wide consumption, raw milk did not kill a single person, even though it is estimated that in California alone 100,000 people drink raw milk weekly."